It is not a surprise that the Bush administration has been chagrining by the Latin American New Left. The electoral results throughout South America have not been going Dudya's way, the countries being governed by new left-leaning presidents are: Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Venezuela, and Chile. And when it comes to attacking unbacked leaders, the US is famous for its propaganda style attacks, such as those used during the US "dirty wars" in the 1980s.

The White House maintained that the an official policy is not to intervening in other countries' elections. However, this rule has always been violated when it concerns US interest and Mexico is no exception.

In February 2005, in congressional testimony, then-CIA director Porter Goss included Mexico in a review of "potential areas for instability," placing the country in the company of Colombia, Venezuela, and Haiti as one of the "flashpoints" in the Western Hemisphere.

POTENTIAL AREAS FOR INSTABILITY
In LATIN AMERICA, the region is entering a major electoral cycle in 2006, when Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, and Venezuela hold presidential elections. Several key countries in the hemisphere are potential flashpoints in 2005.

Campaigning for the 2006 presidential election in Mexico is likely to stall progress on fiscal, labor, and energy reforms.

Since the congressional testimony, Dudya was uncharacteristically been silent about Mexico's political stirrings. It was not until a few days before the July 2 election, Dudya said that it is willing to "work with whoever is chosen by the Mexican people."

Although Washington has been uncharacteristically silent, efforts to discredit Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) the pundits were tasked to do Dudya's dirty work. This time around, the strategy is to turn AMLO into a future Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez's lapdog. Attack ads had the Venezuelan president’s face next to AMLO’s during the presidential race until it was told to take it down.

Beginning in March 2006, the Wall Street Journal published an anti-AMLO column by Mary Anastasia O'Grady - who also vehemently attacked Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez - who argued that AMLO's opposition to President Vicente Fox's pro-corporate economic policy should signal "a worrying authoritarianism with moralistic overtones" and suggested that an alternative path for development would qualify as "wild populist experimentation."

In April 2006, Conservative Felipe Calderón - although denied by the Partido Acción Nacional (PAN) - informally hired two American consultants political advisor and Fox News commentator Dick Morris and Republican strategist Rob Allyn to help him in his failing campaign. In June, El Universal report how Juan Camilo Mourino, Calderón's campaign manager, suddenly started running campaign ads that resembled those of the United States, electoral techniques evidently imported from the United States.

Importing electoral techniques from the United States .... the campaign ran a series of negative television and radio ads - the first significant use of such ads in a Mexican presidential race - portraying him as a threat to Mexico's hard-won gains.

El Universal also reported that Camilo received his training in campaign dirty tricks in the US at "campaign seminars" and he also received "advice" from Dick Morris, who supposedly didn't have "an official role in the campaign."

In May, Proceso, "Mercenary Strategists Without Rival"(in Spanish and by subscription), reported that Calderón contracted Morris and Texas-based political consultant Rob Allyn "to handle not only his image, but the development of his campaign." However, in a phone interview, Allen told Washington Post's Jefferson Morley, "I've never met Dick Morris and we're not associated in any way."

Which explains Morris' action in April 2006, when he published a couple of hit pieces - one in The New York Post, The New York Post, "Menace In Mexico" and other at the ultraconservative online magazine FrontPageMag.com, Mexico's Hugo Chavez - that linked AMLO to President Chávez. Morris' editorial attempted to terrorize readers into believing AMLO's campaign was bankrolled by Venezuela's Hugo Chávez, which means Mexico will become the primary threat to US national security. Morris also claimed an elected AMLO would be the "final piece" needed by President Chávez and Cuba's President Fidel Castro in their "grand plan to bring the United States to its knees before the newly resurgent Latin left."

Chavez is a firm ally of Cuba's Fidel Castro. Lopez Obrador could be the final piece in their grand plan to bring the United States to its knees before the newly resurgent Latin left.

Morris' linked the so those living here and in Mexico would begin to have a distaste for economic policies that have failed Latin America by Populist leaders.

In Mexico, both Felipe Calderón Hinojosa of the right-wing PAN (the party of current president Vicente Fox) and Roberto Madrazo Pintado of the long-ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), ran a barrage of negative ads that lasted for a month. The mudslinging was so bad the Federal Electoral Institute had to step in to censure a series of ads that declared AMLO "a danger to Mexico" and that likened AMLO to Chávez.

Outside of Mexico other newspapers have jumped to run similar type pieces leading up to the July 2 election. Sample of some articles:
London's Independent - "Firebrand on Bush's Doorstep";
The Atlantic Online - "The Talented Mr. Chávez";
New York Times - Bringing Mexico Closer to God
The Economist - Will the real Andrés Manuel López Obrador please stand up?

Now that the election is over in Mexico, the election results are now hanging in the balance.

In Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) fight to demand a recount of Mexico's July 2 presidential election, Prensa Latina is reporting that Mexico's "Por el Bien de Todos" coalition is presenting additional proof electoral violations took place. Among the proof to be shown will be broken seals that were illegally opened at the ballot boxes and proof that a "US daily published propaganda favoring ruling candidate Felipe Calderon three days before the election, an incident that violates the Institutional Federal Code and Electoral Procedures in Mexico."

But is the propaganda campaign over? Not be a long shot. The current oped pieces are beginning to sound a lot like the anti-Chávez meme, the only difference, Chávez is replaced by Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

Since early January 2005, major US publications and television stations have published or broadcast well over 60 articles and programs regurgitating State Department accusations that President Chávez presents a "negative force in the region," is a "threat to democracy," a "semi-dictator,"...

Latest Articles Critical Of AMLO:

July 29, 2006 - Washington Post - An Anti-Democracy Campaign: Mexico's presidential loser takes a lesson from Joseph Stalin.

Now Mr. López Obrador has launched a second populist campaign -- this time in an attempt to overturn Mexico's fragile democracy

July 28, 2006 - Los Angeles Times - López Obrador should protest with dignity

But Lopez Obrador has said he will never accept the results because now he does not accept the legitimacy of the institutions. Like a spoiled child, he wants the right to play, but not the obligation to accept the final score. He'll try to hold Mexico hostage with street demonstrations and increasingly radical rhetoric until he gets his way. Calderon will continue to play by the rules, pursuing his own legal counter-demands through the nation's electoral tribunal and accepting whatever remedies the court orders. The contrast is deafening.

Mexico must be a nation of laws, not of men, if it is to remain a functioning democracy. Any other outcome would be a step on the road to anarchy — a disastrous recipe for Mexico and its northern neighbor — and a blow to the concepts of openness, democracy, tolerance and pluralism in the Americas.

July 26, 2006 - Dallas Morning News (via the Fort Wayne News Sentinel, IN) - Mexico's protests have little to do with democracy

Let's be precise about what's going on in Mexico: The protests that second-place presidential finisher Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador plans to rally again Sunday are all about him, his ego and his standing. They are not about the country, not about its standing in the global economy and certainly not about its democratic evolution.

July 23, 2006 - Arizona Republic, AZ - Loser can make it a winner

Mexico's fragile new democracy needs the confidence of its people, yet Lopez Obrador seems determined to undermine faith in a system that observers inside and outside of Mexico say is working. He wants, among other things, for the tribunal to order a vote-by-vote recount of the ballots....It would be ironic if Lopez Obrador merely used his position to discredit the honest election that just took place in a nation that was once known for the creative corruption of its elections.

July 15, 2006 - Chicago Tribune - Como se dice, sore loser?

It is his right to challenge the election, and voters are entitled to assurances that the results are fair and accurate. But that's why the elections tribunal was created, and there's every reason to believe it will do the right thing. Unfortunately Lopez Obrador seems unwilling to accept that. And that is an ominous sign for Mexico.

July 30, 2006 - Miami Herald - Challenge tests Mexican democracy

This denigration of the respected Mexican electoral system, which had just announced the triumph of hundreds of PRD candidates, and the incendiary speeches that have followed seriously threaten the peace in Mexico.

This is a film the world has seen many times. The seed of dictatorship has been planted. Impermeable to objective truth, a messiah who has proclaimed himself "indestructible" and publicly (and seriously) compared himself to Jesus, seeks to kidnap Mexican democracy. If the ransom he demands (strict obedience by the Federal Electoral Tribunal to his will) is not paid, he is prepared to set the country aflame.

Awww....American propaganda, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Read more!

Amidst of the current top story, other stories have flown under the radar. It seems that Englishnistas have done it again. In New Jersey, by a vote 4 to 2, Bogota's city council has authorized, Steve Lonegan, Bogota's conservative and outspoken Republican mayor, to write a letter urging McDonald's to take down it's billboard that advertises iced coffee in Spanish. He is also for his citizens to boycott McDonald's if they refuse to take down it’s sign.

The mayor of a small Bergen County town is calling for a McDonald's boycott if the fast-food chain does not take down a Spanish-language billboard advertising iced coffee.

His angst against the ad being done in Spanish is that McDonald's is sending a message to Spanish-speaking immigrants that they don't need to learn English. In fact, Lonegan, has characterized the billboard as a "racial profiling marketing campaign."

For most Americans, racism is viewed only white supremacist organizations, KKK, and other similar organizations like them. What does race have to do with language, after all? Is it racist to suggest that immigrants need to learn English to prosper in this country? What's wrong with encouraging them to enter the mainstream rather than remain apart?

Although, these are reasonable questions it diversts the the real issue, racism is a matter of group power; it is about a dominant racial group (whites) striving to maintain its systemic advantages and minorities fighting to subvert the racial status quo.

Whereas the principles liberalism and humanism were used to argue equality in the past, the Englishnistas are now using it as their the main rhetorical weapons to justify contemporary racial inequality. Many conservatives use these principles in an abstract way that allows them to support the racial status quo in an apparently "reasonable" fashion. After receiving criticism Mayor Lonegan explained his opposition to the to the McDonald's ad in meritocratic fashion:

He said the borough welcomes Hispanics and is proud of its diversity. But he added that the English language is the common thread that ties residents together and that the Spanish-language billboard undermines that notion.

"For every one of those people there's 10 people that are proud we're standing up for this," the mayor said.

In Eduardo Bonilla-Silva's "The Linguistics of Color Blind Racism: How to Talk Nasty about Blacks without Sounding 'Racist'" [PDF], Bonilla-Silva argue that his color blind rhoteric has become the new contemporary racetalk.

Mayor Lonegan, is not the only one comtemplating this action. There's a suprising unanimity among white folks across party lines when it comes to attacks on the use of race as a concept, that is coming from liberalism and from the left. One of the hallmarks the Democratic Leadership Council the effot to move the Democratic Party further to the right. In doing so, this attempt has consequences, it will marginalize the inequities of both minorities and the poor all in the name of appeals for "universal" programs. Meanwhile Immigration Reform and Bilingualism have become a bipartisan bloodsport.

Recently, the Congressional Education and Workforce Committee held one of their "field hearings" regarding immigration reform. The purpose of the was to investigate the role of English in the US.

What is the role of English in American education and society, and does the Reid-Kennedy bill undermine, rather than encourage, this role?

This is not the first time the Englishnistas had a crack at Congress.

History of the English Only Movement
Englishnista movement first bagan in 1981 when U.S. English spearheaded the constitutional English Language Amendment. If passed, the proposal would have banned virtually all uses of languages other than English by federal, state, and local governments. By 1988, all but two of the fifty states had at least considered legislation to declare English their official language – most of them in response to lobbying by U.S. English.

However, Englishnistas hit a brick wall when people found out the true motives behind their plan. In 1988, the Arizona Republic published excerpts of a confidential memo from the anti-immigration leader John Tanton. The memo was the seed that planted the idea of the Reconquista movement. The memo discussed the importance of defending "our common language" because of the "threat" of a Hispanic takeover. Unless something was done, it warned, the US would face a Hispanic takeover through immigration and high birthrates:

Gobernar es poblar translates "to govern is to populate." In this society where the majority rules, does this hold? Will the present majority peaceably hand over its political power to a group that is simply more fertile? ... Can homo contraceptivus compete with homo progenitiva [sic] if borders aren't controlled? Or is advice to limit one's family simply advice to move over and let someone else with greater reproductive powers occupy the space? ... Perhaps this is the first instance in which those with their pants up are going to get caught by those with their pants down! ...

How will we make the transition from a dominant non-Hispanic society with a Spanish influence to a dominant Spanish society with a non-Hispanic influence? ... As Whites see their power and control over their lives declining, will they simply go quietly into the night? Or will there be an explosion? ... We're building in a deadly disunity. All great empires disintegrate, we want stability.

The memo was a frank revival of the theory of "race suicide."

Make no mistake, US English may act as it's only purpose is a language issue. US English is the sister organization to Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the organization that deals with the immigration issue. Tanton went off to start FAIR, determined, as he later recalled, to defy "the taboo that in 1979 proscribed discussion of the immigration issue."

US English and FAIR are kept separate because it is a tactical matter. To charge linguistic minorities with refusing to assimilate and simultaneously to propose limiting their numbers smacked of ethnic intolerance, a return to the old nativism. It would reveal an impolitic analysis – shared by several (though not all) leaders of FAIR and U.S. English – that the problem was not merely the quantity of new immigrants, but the quality: too many Hispanics.

Tanton had written the paper for a private study group drawn principally from U.S. English, FAIR, and allied organizations. He dubbed it WITAN, after the Old English witenagemot, or council of wise men to advise the king.

Insecurity And Resentment
For groups like English Only, FAIR, Center for Equal Opportunity, Center for Immigration Studies, Council of Conservative Citizens, among other Immigration Reform and Language Restrictionism advocates they have one target in particular: that amalgam of imperial and indigenous traditions, incorporating Castilian, Galician, Moorish, Aztec, Mayan, Taino, and West African elements, known loosely as "Hispanic." Not that nativists indulge in such fine distinctions. What concerns WITAN is a monolithic set of bad habits that it deems inimical to the American experiment: a "Latin" psychology that breeds underdevelopment, antisocial behavior, authoritarianism, educational failure, overpopulation, and of course, bilingualism. This is an updated version of the Black Legend. The villains are no longer ruthless conquistadores, but "ethnic bosses" who keep their people in bondage.

If the language was really the issue, they must look to their leader to blame to the decline of English. It was Dudya's "No Child left Behind Act," that ended Title VII, the Bilingual Education Act that encouraged "developing the English language skills" of children but also "to the extent possible, the native language skills." The Act began in 1968 under Lyndon Johnson, and was renewed by all four Republicans, three Democrats before him. The new law disregards any instruction in any language other than English.

The Englishnista argument is only based on a Nationalist pride which is why they beat their chest proclaiming "This is America! That's way." Proclaiming English the national language will not unify this country, it will only divide it even further than it already is. The left was capable a decade ago of dissecting such a shell game, but now they are contributed to the fear of the brown menace - The Latino Boogieman.

Modern racial ideology does not thrive on the ugliness of the past, on the language and tropes typical of slavery and Jim Crow. Today, their language is a sanitized to justify keeping minorities out of the good things in life with the language of liberalism ("I am all for equal opportunity; that's why I oppose affirmative action!"). Today's Englishnistas do not feel guilty about a minorities' plight because they simply believe if minorities are not succeeding it's because they are not trying hard enough.

I know I will receive criticisms from conservative and liberal Englishnistas alike, which they will rebuke with statements such as "You are hypersensitive." or "Just because I start disagreeing with you, you start calling out "racism!" Is post is meant to confront the color blind nonsense from within. The collective denial about the true nature of race relations may help them feel good, but it is also one of the greatest obstacles for them to do the right thing. My aim is to provoke, trigger Englishnistas and to expose themselves for who they truly are and counter their abstract liberal bullshit with concrete liberal positions based on a realistic understanding of racial matters and a concern with achieving racial equality.

It is time to demand equality NOW! We must say "NO" to poverty, to substandard schools and housing, to inferior wages and shit jobs, to old and new fashioned discrimination, to Driving While Black, Mexican, or Puerto Rican.

"HELL, NO" to second class citizenship in America. Only by demanding what seems impossible now, will we be able to make true equality possible in the near future.

Viva La Raza!

Read more!

In Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) fight to demand a recount of Mexico's July 2 presidential election, Prensa Latina is reporting that Mexico's "Por el Bien de Todos" coalition is presenting additional proof electoral violations took place. Among the proof to be shown will be broken seals that were illegally opened at the ballot boxes and proof that a "US daily published propaganda favoring ruling candidate Felipe Calderon three days before the election, an incident that violates the Institutional Federal Code and Electoral Procedures in Mexico."

Mexico's election is very similar to another famous election and its not the 2000 and 2004 US Presidential election. Guardian Unlimited's James Galbraith reminds us of the election in the Ukraine, where the favored presidential candidate had claimed fraud in a tight race. It is interesting during that time US defended the right of the citizens for be heard, but this time around, the defender of democracy chooses to defend the Mexican citizens. In fact, Bush went so far to congratulate Calderón, without waiting for the court to rule.

It seems elections only appear to be democratic throughout the world wherever the US has a strategic interest, such as in Colombia and Peru in 2006 and Iraq and Afghanistan in 2005 which these days means everywhere.

Galbraith points out that the difference between the two elections, in Ukraine it was difficult to know exactly where the fraud took place and in Mexico, it is the opposite. In Mexico, the Mexican electoral authority, known as the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE in its Spanish initials) posted the ongoing count on its website in real time, an initiative called PREP. So the whole world was able to monitor the results or did they?

Soon after the election, López Obrador cited many clear irregularities including manipulating preliminary vote totals, initially never counting 3 millions votes and, hours later, the IFE had to acknowledge the mistake. The results published on the Prep's website, regarded at that stage as valid by Mexico and the world, were erroneous; 13,921 ballot-boxes, representing more than 3 million votes, had indeed been excluded from the count. The election was still open, and López Obrador had to wait until July 6 when a hard recount would occur. Once again, the IFE declared Felipe Calderón winner of the recount with a final count being Felipe Calderón with 35.88% and Andrés Manuel López Obrador at 35.31%; a statistical difference of 0.57 points.

What seemed to be a López Obrador victory on July 5, was nothing but an illusion. During the hard count, which López Obrador enjoyed a lead all day, AMLO saw his lead fall to under 0.5 percentage points after 94% of the votes were counted, AMLO with 35.84%, while Felipe Calderon was at 35.35%.

According to La Jornada's Roberto González Amador, the vote totals don't match the percentages reported. Amador explains:

Given the just over 15m votes Calderón was said to have earned, the percentage reported for him, 35.89%, could only be obtained by including invalid ballots in the total reported. If, on the other hand, one takes the overall vote total and the percentage reported for Calderón as correct, then his total vote must have been substantially less than was reported.

The same is true for AMLO and the other candidates, and there is a total shortfall of over a million votes between what can be justified by the official percentages of the valid votes, and the sum of votes reported. The discrepancy proves nothing, but even if it is only a simple error, it certainly seems to cast doubt over the competence of the count.

This was echoed by one of Mexico's top statistician, Victor Romero of Mexico's National University. In a Democracy Now! Exclusive Report, Dr. Romero shows Greg Palast a computer printout how the official tallies matched the exit polls, with challenger López Obrador ahead by 2% all night. It was not until the very end, when several precincts came in for Calderón by 10-to-1, and then 100-to-1, giving Calderón the victory.

A Close Shave
"It's not the voting that's democracy, it's the counting."
-- Tom Stoppard, 1972

To understand how Calderón won the next presidential election, it helps to exam the IFE's website. There seems to be evidence that vote "shaving" has contributed to the election fraud. The pattern has already documented to have helped Calderón on the IFE PREP totals. Although IFE has declared Calderón the winner, IFE still refuses to account where it got its current set of numbers.

Evidence #1: Tabasco precinct number 0245
On the PREP system, IFE reported that López Obrador received 203 votes, however, the acta (the signed precinct result) states that López Obrador received 236 votes. A clear reduction of 33 votes from a single ballot box.

PREP result from Tabasco (click to enlarge image):


The "acta" from precinct number 0245:


Evidence #2: State of Mexico precinct number 1019
IFE reported that López Obrador received 88 votes, while the acta reported that López Obrador received 188 votes. A reduction of 100 votes.

PREP result from State of Mexico (click to enlarge image):



The "acta" from precinct number 1019:


Narco News' Al Giordano provides more evidence on this election phenomenon.

In other districts, there was a pattern of one vote shaved from López Obrador between the acta and the PREP results, or one vote added to Calderón. Narco News has reviewed similar photos of that phenomenon from Baja California precinct 0105 (62 votes for Obrador, 61 reported), and from Baja California precinct 0548 (190 votes for Calderon, 191 reported).

Here are some others; this report only cites those that we have been able to review via photographs of the original actas: Veracruz precinct 2073: 188 votes for Obrador, 186 reported, two votes disappeared. Morelos precinct 0061: 194 votes for Obrador, 190 reported, four votes disappeared. Mexico City precinct 2411: 139 votes for Obrador, 134 reported, five votes disappeared. Querétaro precinct 0375, ballot box #1: 103 votes for Obrador, 102 reported, one vote disappeared. State of Mexico precinct 0855: 208 votes for Obrador, 197 reported, 11 votes disappeared. State of Mexico precinct 0297: 167 votes for Obrador, 159 reported, eight votes disappeared. Mexico City precinct 0444, ballot box #2: 322 votes for Obrador, 318 reported, four votes disappeared.

It's All In The Stuffing
"It's not the people who vote that count. It's the people who count the votes."
-- Josef Stalin

Recently, El Universal reported that López Obrador released a video in which an election official in Salamanca, Guanajuato is caught stuffing many ballots into a ballot box. The video captures a man wearing a blue-and-white shirt (PAN's campaign and logo colors) stuffing one ballot after another into the ballot box. In the Salamanca district, IFE reported that Calderón received 93,062 votes to 23,278 for Obrador. Unfortunately the video is not available online.

In the other video Obrador released, election officials in Querétaro were caught on tape changing the vote tallies to create more votes for its Calderón. Interestingly, PAN does not deny the facts. It simply claims that those cases amounted to normal, allowed, functions by election officials. The public temper rises with every such justification.

With a divided Mexico the Judicial Power Electoral Federation Court (TEPJF in Spanish) is now faced to make a critical decision: a) to count vote by vote, voting stall by voting stall and to eventually recognize Lopez Obrador’s victory; b) validate a fraudulent election declare Felipe Calderón winner; or c) to declare the process null and void, and organize a new presidential elections, which could mean political and social conflicts in an already divided and fragmented Mexico.

Outside Mexico's borders it is widely believed Mexico had a clean election and that they have an excellent electoral structure. However, the evidence and the numbers suggest otherwise. The 1.1 million Mexican people who marched through their capital on July 16 are determined to carry that struggle forward until justice is won.

On Sunday, July 30, 2006, between 2 and 3 millions pissed off peasants and workers aligned with the candidacy of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) will take part in the third of a series of informative meetings in Mexico City's main square, the Zocalo. And to deny then concern is unjust.

AMLO and his supporters are unwilling to yield their contest of the election until a full recount has occurred. At least one member from the TRIFE has indicated that one possible resolution of the current situation would be the annulment of the election.

"In this moment, if National Accion (ed note PAN) continues to reject the opening of ballot boxes, very important decisions are going to be made, vigurous, radical, and absolutely strong actions that leave no doubt that we are not going to permit an imposition. (ed note of the electoral result) The PAN knows, 1988 isn't 2006, this time the imposition will not pass.

Unlike Al Gore, John Kerry, and the Democratic Party, Andres Manuel López Obrador will not settle for anything less, not when the political stability of the country hangs in the balance.

Read more!

Our Prez was down in Russia with his peeps for the G8 summit. Here is the Dudya uncut, showing off his dipolmatic skillz.

Bush to Putin: I gotta leave by 2.15. They want me out of town so they can free up your security forces.

Someone asks Bush whether he wants someone to prepare his closing remarks for the end of the G8 summit.

Bush: No. Just gonna make it up. I'm not going to talk too damn long like the rest of them. Some of these guys talk too long.

With the camera focused elsewhere, it is not clear to whom Bush is talking, but it is thought to have been President Hu Jintao of China.

Bush: Gotta go home. Got something to do tonight.

Go to the airport, get on the airplane and go home. How about you? Where are you going? Home? This is your neighbourhood. It doesn't take you long to get home. How long does it take you to get home?

Reply is inaudible

Bush: Eight hours? Me too. Russia's a big country and you're a big country.

At this point, the President seems to bring someone else into the conversation.

Bush: It takes him eight hours to fly home.

He turns his attention to a server.

Bush: No, Diet Coke, Diet Coke.

He turns back to whomever he was talking to.

Bush: It takes him eight hours to fly home. Eight hours. Russia's big and so is China.

Tony Blair approaches.

Bush: Yo, Blair. How are you doing?

Blair: I'm just . . .

Bush: You’re leaving?

Blair: No, no, no not yet.

And to think, we have two more years, oh joy!

Read more!

One thing is very clear, immigration debate is a complex problem which many would prefer to view it as a simple problem with a simple solution. For example, Grassfire.org's "Stop Invasion" billboards that debuted in Houston and Tucson this week. It is a simple sign, with a straight forward message: "Stop The Invasion: Secure Our Borders."

The debate continues to heat up in the US, which the Natavist continue their efforts to make this issue seem massive therefore scaring this country to death. In fact, many states and cities are coming up with their own reforms. According to a recent USA Today article, 35 states have taken it upon themselves to deal with immigration reform. Out of the 35 states, 27 of them have already enacted 57 bills dealing with the immigration issue according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Bills were enacted in 27 states: Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.

What the immigration debate has done is nothing more but incite what Dave Neiwert at Orcinus calls "eliminationism". Neiwert states that eliminationism is the kind of behavior that shut down any type dialogue for the purpose of "outright elimination of the opposing side, either through complete suppression, exile and ejection, or extermination."

... Rhetorically, it takes on some distinctive shapes. It always depicts its opposition as simply beyond the pale, and in the end the embodiment of evil itself -- unfit for participation in their vision of society, and thus in need of elimination. It often depicts its designated "enemy" as vermin (especially rats and cockroaches) or diseases, and loves to incessantly suggest that its targets are themselves disease carriers. A close corollary -- but not as nakedly eliminationist -- are claims that the opponents are traitors or criminals, or gross liabilities for our national security, and thus inherently fit for elimination or at least incarceration.

And that is where the problems lies. Nativists, like Grassfire, don't care. They prefer the easy way out and that is to create a whole class of criminals out of a group of people who come here to work. It's easier to blame the poverty-stricken pawns in this economic game because they are voiceless. It is easier to take their anger out on them, than to deal with the core problems.

Neiwert will also point out it is this type of behavior that played a part in the driving force behind the Holocaust, which he first encountered it in Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's text Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust.

Hitler's Willing Executioners is an important and impressive piece of scholarship, particularly in the extent to which it catalogues the willing participation of the "ordinary" citizenry in so many murderous acts, as well as in the hatemongering that precipitated them. And his identification of "eliminationism" as a central impulse of the Nazi project was not only borne out in spades by the evidence, but was an important insight into the underlying psychology of fascism.

I have mentioned it before, using labels such as "illegals" is only furthering the nativists' aims of criminalizing the "undocumented" and separating them from the rest of society. It is nothing more setting up a us vs. them situation. It is easy to dehumanize any groups of people in the name of injustice. If they're monsters, criminals, invaders, you name it its okay to lock them up like cattle or round them up and expel them. Possibly separating them from their families, even though they've been here working for decades.

There are legitimate issues surrounding illegal immigration, the immigration debate is a complex issue and it is having an effect here in the US. For one its hurting American jobs and wages. Just recently FL's Gov. Jeb Bush and Agriculture Commissioner Charles Bronson announced that millions of Florida oranges could waste because of a shortage of fruit pickers. In AZ, construction companies are also facing a labor shortage.

o get a sense of the challenge employers face filling the need for workers in Tucson, check out newspaper job listings — on Sundays and Wednesdays you'll find more than 70 employers seeking construction workers. Or look at the stack of yellow fliers inside El Indio Mexican Food Restaurant, 3355 S. Sixth Ave. The ads tout carpentry jobs with "good pay" and "excellent benefits for you and your family."

The notion of rounding up these individuals, building a border wall, placing National Guard troops on the border, itchy trigger finger "Minuteman project" whackos is not only a joke, its exactly what these eliminationists want to see happen.

There is little discussion about why these people come here. That would require generating empathy for the dehumanized, some that the Nativists lack. In order to solve the complex problems surrounding illegal immigration, there are several issues that need to be addressed. The fact is, most undocumented immigrants did not come over with the intention of staying in the United States. Their intent, for a large majority, has and always has been, to come here long enough to earn some money to help their family back home and later return home. But the current laws make that impossible, therefore, they end up living staying longer than they intended.

Marisa Treviño of Latina Lista points out that in the town of Tendeparacua, in Michoacan, Mexico, currently only has 600 people residing there compared the 6,000 residents who lived there in 1985. She also points out that the rural areas of the country, other towns like Tendeparacua, are totally devoid of any working-age men.

People coming in from Mexico and Latin America know they can make much more money working the US than they can at home ($5 an hour instead of $5 per day for example). Since they already worked in extreme conditions in their home country, they realize they can work in the same extremely difficult and labor intensive jobs here in the US for a higher pay in jobs many Americans won't do.

As long as cities who are tired of waiting for Congressional action and taking action into their own hands, such as Hazleton, PA, they are doing nothing more but playing into the hands of the Nativist.

A former coal mining town in Pennsylvania has put itself smack in the middle of the raging debate over U.S. border security by adopting one of the nation's toughest laws against illegal immigration.

The measure, passed by the Hazleton City Council last week, penalizes businesses that hire illegal immigrants and landlords who rent to them.

There is no doubt there are those who are US born Hispanics or who are here legally who are happy to see cities like these take care of the "mojado/a" problem. For right now, they will say they don't mind being stopped by the police to prove they are citizens because to them the police are doing their job. Nor do they really mind having people suspect them that they are illegally here because these are "dangerous times." But all these actions do have hidden consequence. History has a nasty way of repeating itself when it comes to racial profiling.

And during these times, the revised version of Pastor Martin Niemoller's First they came poem by Applied Research Center is very appropriate.

And I Said Nothing (Revisited)
In the United States
They first came for the ARAB AMERICANS
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t Arab American.
Then they came for people from MUSLIM countries
and I didn’t speak up because I was born in the U.S.
Then they profiled PEOPLE OF COLOR as terrorist suspects
and I didn’t speak up because I must not look like a terrorist.
Then they targeted IMMIGRANTS,
and I didn’t speak up because I have legal status.
Then they arrested SOCIAL JUSTICE ACTIVISTS
and I didn’t speak up because I was afraid to get involved.
Then they came for YOU AND ME– –
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

- adapted by Applied Research Center , 2003

None of these issues are being addressed by the Bush Administration and Congress. Its rarely talked about in the media and certainly not by the Nativists who don't want to regulate businesses or levy fines against those who hire illegal workers for cheap slave labor. To the Nativist and their eliminationist rhetoric its all about catch, detain, and deport.

Read more!

On the rare occassion I decide to check my FeedBurner stats, today I just happen to see something very unusual. According to FeedBurner, Linkie Winkie has been crawling my feeds. Does anybody know what is Linkie Winkie?

The web site says it is a "social experiment." And they are not going give any information about this little experiment. It does go on to say that it is "altruistic" and "loves to be talked about." Since I love to investigate such little mysteries, I googled to see who else is talking about Linkie. It seems like other bloggers have not answers to the million dollar question - "What is Linkie Winkie?"

Well, it seems that if ya wink at Linkie Winkie, and if Linkie Winkie winks back at you, then a link will appear on their web site. However, it does say that timing is important.

So heres winkin at ya, Linkie.

Read more!

Dedicated to Nizam El Hakam, be safe my friend.

What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?
- Mahatma Gandhi, "Non-Violence in Peace and War"

Read more!

Right after the Mexican Elections on July 2, I was asked if I knew MATT. According to the posted comment on ePluribus Media, MATT stands for Mexicans and Americans Thinking Together or MATT.org. The Houston Chronicle did a write up of MATT when they noticed that MATT ran a couple of commercials during the ALMA Awards.

Twice during a recent, prime-time Latino awards show featuring Jennifer Lopez, Andy Garcia and other Hollywood heavies, viewers saw commercials for a new, bilingual Web site with a daunting agenda.

Mexicans and Americans Thinking Together, or MATT.org, is a nonpartisan, nonprofit interactive Web site launched on Cinco de Mayo after thousands took to the streets in Houston and across the nation to protest U.S. House legislation that would make illegal immigration a felony. A compromise bill was passed May 25, but MATT founders see a continuing need for calm discussion in the fractious national debate over illegal immigration.

According the Chronicle, Lionel Sosa is one of MATT's co-founders, however, the Chronicle never mentions MATT's other co-founder. In fact, after doing a little internet research, the Chronicle is not the only one who also has done this, it seems that MATT's other co-founders aren't interested in being want to be identified just yet.

The obvious question then is, who is Lionel Sosa? Sosa, is a son of Mexican immigrants and a successful businessman who happens to be close to the Bush family. Sosa entered into the political scene back in the late 70's. According to Time, Sosa was hired by former Texas GOP U.S. Senator John Tower to help deliver the Hispanic vote. Tower won his 1978 re-election bid with 37% of the Hispanic vote. Soon after, Sosa became known as the man who could deliver the Hispanic vote. He has worked for President Ronald Reagan in 1980, first President Bush in 1988, and the second President Bush in 2004. Time writes:

In 1980 Ronald Reagan reached out to Sosa, who created gauzy, feel-good ads that focused on the candidate rather than the issues, promising Latinos that Republicans shared their values of family, personal responsibility and hard work. "It's an insight Ronald Reagan gave me," says Sosa, who has worked on six presidential campaigns. "He told me Latinos are Republican. They just don't know it yet." With Sosa's help, George W. Bush snared an estimated 40% of Latino voters in 2004, a huge jump from Bob Dole's 21% in 1996.

Right after Tower's election, Sosa eventually founded Sosa, Bromley, Aguilar, Noble & Associates and soon after Reagan's election, Sosa's company really picked up. One of their major clients was the US Army, which produced 40% of its billings from 1982-85, other clients included Anheuser-Busch, Coca-Cola, Budweiser, Bacardi Rum, Westinghouse and GTE.

Sosa, Bromley, Aguilar, Noble & Associates was once the largest Hispanic ad agency in the US and at one point the company was billing more than $100 million annually. Sosa went on to head DMB&B Americas, a network of 20 ad agencies specializing in Latin America. Sosa is now retired and his "legacy continues with San Antonio-based Bromley Communications, whose CEO is Ernest Bromley" according to the San Antonio Express-News. Bromley Communications is now the country's largest Hispanic ad firm.

MATT blls itself as being nonpartisan, however, when the website launched, both San Antonio Express-News and the Washington Post reported that Matt.org is the brainchild of Texas adman Lionel Sosa and that the group began with $5 million dollars in "seed money" from "a group of Mexican businesspeople." MATT.org will is just one of many MATTs to come. Both the Express-News and the Chronicle report that Sosa and his mysterious deep pocket backers plan are to launch another site on Sept. 16, Mexico's Independence Day, Mexicans and Americans Trading Together, or MATT.biz. The Chronicle reported MATT.biz would "foster U.S.-Mexico business while promoting and funding the nonprofit MATT.org."

It is not surprising that the netroots is playing a key role in getting political information out to the public. In fact, the Internet did play a role regarding the 2006 U.S. immigration reform protests by helping to "get the word out" on the dates and locations for the marches and demonstration protests. Is this Sosa's way to get in on the Internet political action?

In its attempts to be non-partisan in its opinions and with less than 20 articles since their inception, on July 9, right after the hard count of the precincts in the Mexican elections, the headline that ran on MATT.org revived their colors:

MATT Was First To Predict!
Matt was the first to predict Calderon would be Mexico's Next President.

And before Mexico's July 2nd Presidential election, Narco News' Al Giordano and previously reported by the Express-News, noted that in mid-June the same organization, Matt.org said exactly the opposite; saying that it was a "two horse race" between Obrador and Madrazo, with Calderon out of the race.

"With the Mexican Presidential election only two weeks away and a new round of polling completed in MATT's historic presidential poll, a 3-way tie is looking more like a 2-horse race. If the election were held today, Calderon would be out of the race. Why? Because he would need almost 80% of the undecided votes to overtake Obrador; a statistical and political impossibility. What other polls don't see is this: with Calderon out of the race, the number 2 horse, Madrazo, is running stronger than anyone thinks."

MATT.org being confident about its findings went even further, the website read: "New Presidential Poll Results! From 3-way tie to 2-horse race.... 116,000 likely voters can't be wrong."

Was this a case of selective amnesia? Perhaps. The University of Texas at Austin's Center for Interactive Advertising (ciAd) provides a pretty good insight on Sosa's rise to be the largest Hispanic ad agency in the US. There are significant differences among Hispanics - varying national origin, political and demographic are among those differences. For example, Cuban-Americans tend to be older and more likely to vote Republican than Mexican-Americans. According to ciAd, Sosa's influence in the Hispanic market had to do with a method he developed and copyrighted. Sosa's method involved segmenting the Hispanic Spanish-language market into acculturation influence groups. Acculturation is the process of adapting to another culture while keeping one's original culture intact. In order to deliver the correct message marketers seek to identify three markers - generational, language preference and cultural differences within the Hispanic population. Once they are identified they then categorized by varying degrees of acculturation: unacculturated, partially acculturated and completely acculturated. In short, acculturation is the method that is able to explain why a second-generation Mexican-American who grew up somewhere in the Southwest has more in common with a third-generation Puerto Rican from New York than with a Mexican who arrived from Jalisco last year.

In surfing through the website, Matt.org tends to play more to the highly acculturated Hispanic group, those who are more likely to be U.S.-born and raised and upper-class. What is disturbing, is the message it is sending out. The Chronicle reports:

Surfing through the many blog conversations, however, reveals a far less than sanguine outlook. For instance:

"Ya know, Adolph Hitler once said 'cockroaches are a very nasty sub-species. They are very hard to exterminate but with time and patience, it can be done!' And, yes, he was referring to the Jews. But on the other hand, isn't this 'infestation' onto our soil something us AMERICANS should be concerned about," ventures one poster.

The Chronicle went on to say MATT leaders downplay the more extreme views voiced on the thread. Another questionable feature is MATT's people finder. The website claims that is will help connect those who "live in Mexico and have lost touch with a loved one now living the United States." One has to wonder if this is a menthod locating the undocumented here in the US to help the Republicans in their fight for immigration control and mass deportation.

It is hard not to conclude MATT is a GOP front for astroturfing or maybe even more. With an election coming up in November, was the Mexican Presidential election a test run for Sosa in directing an outcome? One thing is for sure, MATT is no where close to being nonpartisan.

Read more!

First, I like to thank everybody for all the kind words.

Returning home, I reflected on the recent events that occurred regarding my grandmother this past week. The only thing that comes to mind to describing what I witnessed is the mythical bird, the Phoenix.

It is said that the legendary bird lived for 500 years. Near the end of its life, the phoenix would build a funeral pyre for itself. As it began to die, the nest would burst into flames reducing both the nest and the phoenix into ashes. From the ashes the Phoenix arises to live for another 500 years.

This is not to say, I am expecting my grandmother to be immortal, but she does come really close to it. My grandmother is 97 years old and to my knowledge, this is the second time she has cheated death. In the medical and social service geriatric fields, she would be considered to be frail elderly because she has totally become dependent on others for her survival needs. Before being admitted to the hospital, she already had many health problems including knee replacement, osteoporosis, and dementia due to her Alzheimer's. She also required more care than my aunt and her caregiver was able to provide. She was admitted to the hospital because she had fallen down after she tired to get out of her wheelchair. We were told by the orthopedic surgeon, the fracture in her leg was near the hip and would require surgery, but given her age and her health, it was risky and the chances for survival was slim. The other choice we had was to try to stabilize her and wait till the bones heal, however, there are another complications which would also have the same result, however, it would be a slower and painful end.

No matter how much healthcare has changed, one thing remains the same - a system based on authority. During a time like this both the family and the patient are vulnerable around a doctor because they're more concerned about getting treatment than addressing the lack of compassion. It was not until I asked the surgeon, a more personal question. I asked him, given the same situation, what would he do if it was his own mother or grandmother. It is interesting to see the robotic nature turn humanistic. The knowledge he had about the risks involved was further explained, which in the end, the decision was easier make. The choice was surgery - having a small once of hope will always outweigh dying by pain and suffering.

However, the journey was not over. My week with my grandmother help shed light in a microcosm way to the larger picture in the US when it comes to healthcare. My grandmother was inadequately provided any type of care when she was first admitted to the hospital and it was not until they found out about our family influence that scared them to start giving a damn about my grandmother.

The day I got there, my grandmother was on her death bed and probably wouldn't have even made it to the operation. By the time I arrived, she was completely dehydrated nor was she given any type of pain medication. The excuse the nurse gave for the her lack of medication, my grandmother had to request for her meds and it was "the weekend"; this obviously raised red flags and would indicate it will be a battle for my grandmother's survival. It wasn't too difficult to see my grandmother was unable to speak, therefore, making it impossible for her to communicate vocally she was in severe pain. However, one would hope that someone could figure out that when a person is agitated, grabbing her leg, not eating, and not sleeping the night that these are sure signs of discomfort. Since it happened to be the "weekend", I guess the medical profession are allowed to turn off their brains and hope their patients will be able to survive through the weekend.

I kid you not, when I was left alone with her, she must have seen something in me or I reminded of someone, because her physical actions mimicked someone who was ready to die. The minute she saw me, she smiled peacefully and lay her arms across her chest. At one point, she stretched her arms reaching for the light. Could have her dementia taken over? Who really knows, but only her. It was not until my sister, a medical doctor, started raising hell did the hospital finally gave her medication.

And it was not until the next day, the hospital started giving her the royal treatment as soon as they found out that one of my grandmother's children happened to own her own consulting business which happens to prepare hospitals for their accreditation. The hospital also found out that one of my grandmother's grandchildren is a local reporter who also happens to know the CEO of the hospital. One thing was for sure, heads rolled and care was provided. It is unfortunate it had to get to this point. Once she received proper care, like the Phoenix, she rose from her own ashes, beating the odds that were placed against her.

Although, I am happy for my grandmother's recovery, I can not help but wonder what the outcome would have been if we didn't have the resources that we were fortunate to have or if we didn't fight for a person who was voiceless. There is no denying that fact that there were many factors that were stacked against my grandmother, she was elderly, female and a minority. In a nation that is considered to have one of the best healthcare systems in the world, it saddens me to know that these factors tend to work against a person. But was is worse, the studies that continue to show that age, race and class matters in the type of health care a person receives are all true and a government who refuses to correct the situation.

Read more!

I am sorry I have to cut my coverage short on Mexico's election. But, I do have to go out of town for a family emergency. Most likely to say my final good-bye to my grandmother.

Read more!

After Mexico's Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) vote count, the IFE declared Felipe Calderón the top vote-getter in what is seen as the tightest presidential election in Mexico's history.

Final Count:
Felipe Calderón: 35.88%
Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 35.31%
Difference/Diferencia - 0.57 pts

What seemed to be a López Obrador victory on July 5, was nothing but an illusion. During the hard count, which López Obrador enjoyed a lead all day, AMLO saw his lead fall to under 0.5 percentage points after 94% of the votes were counted, AMLO with 35.84%, while Felipe Calderon was at 35.35%.

López Obrador, his supporters, the 2.5 million voters who were thrown out, and many others have publicly questioned the results. That day, López Obrador announced he will challenge the vote count in the Electoral Tribunal.

López Obrador demanded that electoral officials carry out a manual ballot-by-ballot count, instead of just tallying vote totals as they have been doing.

But Luis Carlos Ugalde, president of the Federal Electoral Institute, said that was not possible.

"Mexican law is very clear on when a ballot box can be opened: only when there are problems with the vote tallies, when the tally sheet has obviously been changed, or when the box has been tampered with," Ugalde said.

The close race has opened up doubts about the legitimacy of the winner and this is the one scenario that the IFE hoped to avoid. Unlike here in the United States, when legitimacy is questioned it can lead to mass protests with the claim that the public's will has been violated. Another scenario that the IFE was hoping to avoid. Unfortunately, it will soon become IFE's nightmare. Soon after IFE announcement, López Obrador called on his supporters to rally in Mexico City's vast central square.

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who has a history of mobilizing millions, had called on his supporters to turn out Saturday in the capital.

Mexico is a literal powder keg ready to explode and this is raising fears that Saturday's protests will lead to unrest. If those who manipulated the election figured the Mexican people were going to act apathetically as their American counter-part, they better think again. According to CNN, there are already scattered protests through out Mexico, the day before the mass rally, "including one in front of the Federal Electoral Institute". Once López Obrador raised concern of election fraud, that was enough set off a chain reaction in a country already known for its corruption and a history of electoral fraud.

Mass rallies are now called throughout Mexico. Frustrated coalitions groups, the telephone workers union, the national workers union among others are urging for people to join in civil resistance to defend the "legality of the vote."

Calderón may callously try to quell the rising fears, especially among his base and offer an olive branch to ALMO, but it is the other side is not buying his false peace offering. They have seen this scenario before in 1988 when the newly formed PRD actually won the presidential elections and then have taken away from them when the computer system that was counting the vote "crashed".

The government installed a highly touted computerized vote tabulation system, offering to let opposition CFE representatives monitor it on election night. But one representative from PAN became frustrated with the slow trickle of results. He noticed that CFE technicians loyal to the PRI were using a different entry code than the one supplied to him. Upon entering it, he gained access to the file where the actual results were being compiled, and found that he and the other CFE opposition members were being fed carefully edited numbers. When he tried to print the screen that showed opposition candidates leading, CFE technicians became alarmed; they placed a phone call, and within minutes the computer shut down.

After the dust settled - protests, repression and demands for a real count - it was the PAN and PRI who decided it was better to burn the evidence - ballots - of their dirty work. And it is this event that continues to stay in a lot a lot of people's memory, but this time, they will refuse to be pushed around from by the wealthy - the haves - and this time around, the disenfranchised really mean business. The IFE, the PAN, Fox and Calderón are playing with fire and it is unwise to play down their outrage, especially when people use the words like revolt and revolution.

Outside Mr. López Obrador's campaign headquarters, dozens of supporters – some crying or shouting profanities – urged their candidate to take the fight to the streets. Amid cries of, "If there's no solution, there will be a revolution," supporters vowed to deliver a long, bitter summer.

"This is just beginning," said Elena de la Torre, a history professor and protest organizer. "We're ready for a long fight, not for the PRD, or for López Obrador, but for this nation. We have to rescue our values, rescue our country from these right-wingers."

Marien Villalobos, 22, a university student, sobbed as her mother, 51-year-old Cecilia Garza, consoled her. Both called for a vote-by-vote recount as a way to unite the country.

A full vote count is just a first step. But to really heal the country, an investigations must occur and explain missing 2.5 million missing votes and an explanation as to why the limited number of ballots at the special polls. Although the electoral rules changed due to the 1988 scandal, however, so has the attitude of the citizenry. Mexico is about to explode and her people are unlikely to desist until their demands for a fair election have been met.

Read more!

Update: It is seems in the end, Calderon pulled a miracle in the end. The latest count.
11:50 with 99.80% counted
López Obrador: 35.34%
Felipe Calderón: 35.85%
Difference/Diferencia - 0.51 pts

Andrés Manuel López Obrador will contest the IFE vote count. Note to Gore, Kerry and future Democratic candidates, y'all can learn a lot from AMLO, he listened to his base. And if one of two actually did what AMLO is doing now, one of them could be President now.

Andrés Manuel López Obrador confirma que se impugnarán los resultados del conteo de casillas del IFE.
--------------------------------------

The nation-wide vote count has been taking place throught out the the day starting at 8:00 am this morning. The IFE has reported that Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador is ahead by two and half points with 37.02 percent of the vote against 34.39 percent of the vote in favor of Felipe Calderon. 40% of the ballot sites have been accounted for which is approximately 17 million votes.
------------------------------
Los cómputos disponibles hasta ahora de los 300 Consejos Distritales muestran una ventaja electoral para el candidato presidencial de la coalición Por el Bien de Todos, Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

18:25 con 76.46% de las casillas computadas en los 300 Distritos Electorales del país
Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.76%
Felipe Calderón: 34.62%
Roberto Madrazo: 22.07%
Patricia Mercado: 2.71%

18:55 con 78.57% 32,891,296
López Obrador: 36.73%
Felipe Calderón: 34.63%
Roberto Madrazo: 22.09%
Patricia Mercado: 2.71%

19:30 con 80.44% 33,647,358
López Obrador: 36.67%
Felipe Calderón: 34.67%
Roberto Madrazo: 22.??%
Patricia Mercado: 2.??%

20:20 con 83.53% ------- July 2, 87.2% of the vote counted
López Obrador: 36.55% (7/2/06 - 35.65%)
Felipe Calderón: 34.73% (7/2/06 - 36.88%)

20:59 con 86.61% ------- July 2, 87.2% of the vote counted
López Obrador: 36.46% (7/2/06 - 35.65%)
Felipe Calderón: 34.83% (7/2/06 - 36.88%)

Read more!

On June 26, 2006, Mexican journalist Carmen Aristegui, on CNN Español, was able to access the restricted area on Calderón campaign website by using the username Hidebrando117 and a password she received from an unnamed source. What she found is further proof that Mexico's election was stolen. Calderón campaign had the entire national IFE voter list which also cross-referenced confidential government information on which voters receive government assistance or contracts from all the federal agencies.

She found information about herself, her family members, the IFE president, and the PRI presidential candidate.

The video is in Spanish and is found below this post.

(H/T to Victor Hernandez at El Sendero del Peje al 2006 for the video and Narco News for background information on the video)

Read more!

Las pruebas en video de que el PAN uso ilegalmente el Padrón Electoral, la corrupción en su maxima expresión. (10 minutos)

(h/t a El Sendero del Peje)

Read more!

PAN's Felipe Calderón declared victory in a bitterly contested election over as official returns show him ahead of Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), 36% to 35% with 96% of the votes counted.

But like a thief in the night, what seemed like a win for López Obrador, turned out to be just a dream. At 11:20PM CT López Obrador had declared victory with the current numbers dwindling for Calderón, which he told his supporters that it was confirmed by the Federal Election Institute (IFE).

"Tenemos información de conteos rápidos en donde estamos cuando menos 500 mil votos arriba. Vamos a seguir informando a los ciudadanos", subrayó el candidato izquierdista.

Confirmó su respeto a los resultados del IFE el próximo miércoles e hizo un llamado a las instituciones electorales a que respeten los resultados.

Oddly, within a few minutes, Cardenas declared victory too.

How was it possible for López Obrador to make such a claim of victory?

Ana Maria Salazar Slack at at Mexico Today provides a link to parametria.com.mx which provided hour by hour exit polling for the Excelsior newspaper. According to the exit polls, López Obrador won.

(I saved the pic just in case it mysteriously disapears.)

Here are the last poll numbers before the election via boz at Bloggings by boz. Only three polls have Calderon winning the election, while the rest point to an AMLO victory.

El Universal: AMLO 36, Calderon 34, Madrazo 26
Milenio: AMLO 35, Calderon 31, Madrazo 22
Mitofsky: AMLO 36, Calderon 33, Madrazo 27
Reforma: AMLO 36, Calderon 34, Madrazo 25
Zogby: Calderon 30, AMLO 27, Madrazo 24
Excelsior: AMLO 36, Calderon 34, Madrazo 27
GEA-ISA: Calderon 33, AMLO 31, Madrazo 20
Marketing Politico: Calderon 31, AMLO 29, Madrazo 22
Guadalajara University: AMLO 36, Calderon 34, Madrazo 25

After seeing two elections get hijacked in the United States, the events that occurred in Mexico is beginning to resemble the past two US Presidential elections. (see here and here)

Washington Post's Ceci Connolly, Campaign Conexión, the Post's blog on the elections, wrote an interesting post - Shades of Bush-Gore 2000?

Was the election hijacked too? Was Greg Palast correct? This morning Palast weighed in on the recent situation and wrote:

As in Florida in 2000, as in Ohio in 2004, the exit polls show the voters voted for the progressive candidate, but the race is "officially" too close to call.

But they will call it — after they steal it. Reuters News agency reports that, as of 8pm Eastern time, as voting concluded in Mexico, exit polls show Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of the "left-wing" Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) leading in exit polls over Felipe Calderon of the ruling conservative National Action Party (PAN).

We’ve said again and again: Exit polls tell us how voters say they voted, but the voters can't tell pollsters if their vote will be counted. In Mexico, counting the vote is an art, not a science — and Calderon's ruling crew is very artful indeed. The PAN-controlled official electoral commission, not surprisingly, has announced that the presidential tally is too close to call.

Many will consider this just being very coincidental, and doubt that there is a possibility of this election being rigged, however, there was another major coincidence that also occurred last night and that has to do with the news media.

In Connolly's, Shades of Bush-Gore 2000?, she writes:

Televisa, the 800-pound Mexican media gorilla, was also holding off on projections, announcing the presidential contest was within the margin of error. These guys weren't going to make a mistake like their U.S. counterparts.

Similarly, El Universal was playing it safe. But Reforma, with less than 2 percent of the vote counted, was showing Felipe Calderón comfortably ahead. (Warning: Do not go to the bank with that.)

Erwin C. at The Latin Americanist provides a timeline of events that occurred last night after the polls were closed.

[Key to initials: AMLO = Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. RM = Ricardo Madrazo. FC = Felipe Calderon. IFE = Mexican electoral board]

11:40pm- CNN en Español reports on the results of the election before the IFE's official preliminary report, a move the broadcaster on Azteca America deems "irresponsible." (Mind you, the broadcaster did not name CNN en Español directly, but that was easily inferred in his snarky comments). CNN en Español latest numbers (with about 20% of votes counted) is FC in 1st with 38.9%, ALMO 2nd with about 35%, and RM in 3rd with 28.9%.

Hypocrisy? Now Azteca America’s Armando Guzman acknowledges that so far the ballots counted "may" favor FC, but warns that "this is a horse race" which is far from over.

12:55am- A whirlwind of action over the past twenty minutes:

-Azteca America returns to its diatribe against "television networks from the United States" that "lied and bluffed you" by giving preliminary results.

Now go back to November 2, 2004. One of the major complaint regarding the US election was how the news media were impatient on holding off on announcing the winner.

Time after time, nervous television presenters in the US hedged on whether to call states for President George W Bush or John Kerry, invoking lessons from the mistakes of the 2000 election. ... But the networks split, with Fox and NBC calling the key swing state of Ohio for Mr Bush in the middle of the night, long before ABC, CBS and CNN felt comfortable calling the race.

There will be those who will doubt these assumptions as evidence of election fraud, and choose to ignore the coincidences between Mexico’s and the US elections. I think this is a foolish attitude to take considering there are many similarities that occurred in Mexico that just happened to occur in the 2000 and 2004 US Presidential elections.

As of this writing at 13:32CT only 97.84% of the votes counted
Calderón - 36.35% - 13,944,924
López - 35.37% - 13,570,593
Madrazo - 21.57% - 8,274,051

compare to the last update I gave at 8:13AM with only 95% of the votes counted. Sort of odd how slow the last 5% of votes are being counted.

As of 08:13AM CT with 94.99% of the vote counted
Calderón - 36.52% - 13,730,646
López - 35.44% - 13,323,686
Madrazo - 21.34% - 8,022,590

Read more!

Nota: Esta es una traducción por computadora de la página web original. Se suministra como información general y no debe considerarse completa ni exacta.

Hoy, el 2 de julio, más de 70 millones de votantes registrados votarán en la elección nacional de México. Los votantes elegirán a un presidente, a legisladores, a tres gobernadores del estado y a alcalde de Ciudad de México.

Hay cinco candidatos que están disputando en la elección presidencial de México - Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Felipe Calderón, Roberto Madrazo, Patricia Mercado y Roberto Campa. Los tres competidores principales son:

• Andrés López Obrador, Partido de la Revolución Democrática (PRD)/Alianza por el Bien de Todos - Partido liberal de México;
• Felipe Calderón, Partido Acción Nacional (PAN) - partido conservador de México; y
• Roberto Madrazo, Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), partido predominante anterior de México solo a partir de 1920 a 2000

El fondo y las ideas políticas de los tres candidatos principales es proporcionado por BBC y Wikipedia.

Andrés López Obrador
López Obrador, 52, es uno de los políticos más populares de México y casi fue barrado del funcionamiento. El año pasado, El Procurador General de la República de México intentó hacer descarrilar su oferta para la presidencia acusándolo sobre un conflicto de menor importancia de la tierra. Después de que los centenares de millares marcharan en su ayuda en Ciudad de México, la demanda legal contra él fue caída.

Durante su arrendamiento como alcalde de Ciudad de México, él ganó una reputación para su honradez, un horario grueling del trabajo y su puesta en práctica de varias obras públicas y programas sociales eso se significa para ayudar el al pobre y perjudicado: solas madres, jubilados y el físicamente lisiado y mentalmente.

Él también ha fundado la primera universidad nueva en Ciudad de México en tres décadas, Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México (UACM).

En 1996, López Obrador apareció en la TV nacional mojada en confrontaciones de siguiente de la sangre con las autoridades de la aplicación de ley para bloquear los pozos de petróleo de Pemex que defendían las derechas de los indios locales afectados por la contaminación. (vídeo)

Plataforma de la campaña
El lema de la campaña de López Obrador es "para el bueno de todos, primero el pobres" y han hecho campaña alrededor de su “50 comisiones para reconstruir plataforma del orgullo nacional", que tensionan el reconocimiento de las derechas de la gente indígena, becas para los inabilitados y healthcare y educación el mejorar. Recientemente, Washington Post funcionó un artículo que comparaba a López Obrador con Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Su programa económico se basa en un social-democrático y la ideología de Keynesian que confía en inversiones públicas y mayor poder adquisitivo entre los pobres y las clases medias de estimular la demanda agregada, que, alternadamente, estimularía crecimiento. Con su tendencia a redistribuir renta hacia abajo, este tipo de ideología se considera "izquierdista" en México, especialmente en México norteño a lo largo de la frontera de Nosotros-México.

Felipe Calderón
Calderón, 44, abogado educado Harvard, es el hijo de su partido, Partido nacional de la acción (CACEROLA), fundador, Luis Calderon Vega.

Él no es ningún extranjero a la política mexicana. Él era un representante federal en la asamblea legislativa, y en dos diversas ocasiones en el compartimiento de diputados. Él funcionó para el cargo de Gobernador de Michoacan en 1995 y es también presidente anterior de su partido a partir de 1996 a 1999. Debajo de presidente Fox, Calderón fue designado director de Banobras, un banco de desarrollo nacional, y más adelante como secretaria de la energía de México a partir de 2002 a 2004.

Él ha funcionado una campaña negativa contra su rival izquierdista, ligándolo a presidente Hugo Chavez de Venezuela en anuncios de la TV que proclamaba: "Lopez Obrador es un peligro a México".

Plataforma de la campaña
Calderón está funcionando en una plataforma que sea similar al partido republicano de los Estados Unidos, el partido conservador de los partidos demócratacristianos de Canadá o de Europa. Él está funcionando basó en los ideales que fundaron el partido en los años 40: fidelidad a la iglesia y a la familia, ayuda para la empresa privada y ayuda a los que tienen menos.

Él ha movido hacia atrás la consolidación del programa del social-bienestar llamado Oportunidades, que las blancos apoyan al extremadamente pobre. La estrategia antipobreza de Calderón se centra en transferencias de la renta y de los servicios al edificio muy pobre, y a largo plazo del capital humano.

Calderón es favorecido por la comunidad de negocio porque él desea promover desarrollo económico estimulando la inversión privada. Él ha prometido para continuar las políticas del mercado libre perseguidas por presidente Vicente Fox. Él también ha prometido para gobernar México con un puño del hierro, que significaría las oraciones de la vida para los secuestradores. Él también ha dicho que él empujará para un acuerdo de la migración con los E.E.U.U. de legalizar la implantación para el mexicano que han vivido allí por más de tres años.

Roberto Madrazo
Madrazo, 53, es el hijo de Carlos Alberto Madrazo Becerra. Él es también político de la carrera. Él primero ensambló el PRI como adolescente y ha representado el partido en funciones numerosas. Lo eligieron más adelante como senador, diputado federal, gobernador de Tabasco, su estado casero. Él es también el presidente del PRI.

Aunque él es formaron al candidato del PRI, después de las primarias, una alianza con el PVEM (partido verde mexicano del ecologista), él es también el candidato a ese partido.

Plataforma de la campaña
Es duro decir cuál es plataforma de la campaña de Madrazo. Uno podría especular que el partido que ha gobernado México por más de 70 años, el objetivo principal de PRI es recuperar y la retención de ella es energía existente. Puesto que el PRI ha gobernado por tan muchos años, el partido consiste en casi cada visión política dentro de sus filas. Según Wikipedia, su ideología política es democracia social.

Hasta ahora, Madrazo ha hecho campaña en la importancia de México recursos de agua del país, que ha sido una edición importante a lo largo de la frontera de Nosotros-México. Él ha estado apuntando tan principalmente centros importantes de la energía de PRI a lo largo de la frontera donde está una edición el agua importante.

En Bloomberg, en mayo, senador mexicano Manuel Bartlett, líder dentro de PRI, ha impulsado a sus miembros echar sus votos para López Obrador en la elección presidencial para derrotar Calderon. Algunos dirían, es una alianza informal entre los dos partidos, pero eso no se confirma y todavía no sigue siendo especulación.

Encuestas
Actualmente, la demostración López Obrador de las encuestas y Calderón runing una raza muy cercana. Según las encuestas pasadas conducidas antes de un apagón obligatorio de la interrogación que comenzó hace la demostración López Obrador de siete días levemente delante de Calderón. Dos encuestas, Reforma y El Universal, demostración López Obrador (el 36%) 2 puntos delante de Calderón (el 34%) con Madrazo en el 25% y el 26%. Solamente una encuesta, Ulises Beltran y Asociados, las demostraciones López Obrador y Calderón absolutamente igualan en el 34%.

Las expatrias
Elección mexicana los funcionarios están esperando que muy pocos votaran el domingo por los que vivan a bordo. El rodear de las reglas se expatrió a la derecha para votar y los candidatos que hacían campaña fuera de México han hecho muy terminantes, por lo tanto, esto es un factor importante para su carencia de la participación.

Implicación de los E.E.U.U. en elecciones mexicanas
BushCo ha estado prestando la atención muy cercana a la elección de México, y también aparece BushCo es infierno-se dobló en la rasgadura de democracia de las manos mexicanas.

Tanto como Bush ha sido crítico de la Nueva York Times para escaparse de los expedientes financieros de Dudya wiretap en ciudadanos de los E.E.U.U., The Times, Promesa de los hoyos de la elección de México contra miedo, también ha hecho un esfuerzo de desacreditar a López Obrador.

"Mi miedo es ése con López Obrador que podríamos terminar para arriba muy pronto con un presidente todo-de gran alcance otra vez," Enrique Krauze, autor y el historiador, dijo lunes en Consejo sobre relaciones extranjeras en Nueva York, agregando a ese Sr. López Obrador era "muy ignorante" y "introspectivo" y "despide la regla de la ley mientras que algo hecho por el bourgeoisie oprime a pobres."

El Los Ángeles Times divulgado semejantemente:

Una victoria del candidato izquierdista Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador agregaría el 2 de julio un punto enfático del exclamation a una serie de elecciones latinoamericanas que ha visto a votantes redondo rechazar el “consenso de Washington,” el modelo que acentúa políticas fiscales de la disciplina y del favorable-mercado.

Una victoria del candidato conservador Felipe Calderon pudo hacer México un U. más fuerte.S. aliado que siempre antes.
...
Como el Silva del da de Luiz Inacio Lula del Brasil, Lopez Obrador es el candidato de un partido izquierdista establecido con una tradición orgullosa de la resistencia al authoritarianism.
...
Lopez Obrador es un líder oscuro-pelado en un país en donde justo-pelados tienden para dominar la clase política - algo que él comparte con Hugo Chavez de Venezuela. Y como las morales de Evo de Bolivia, él tiene credenciales como combatiente del activista y de la calle - Lopez que era Obrador bloodied por el policía durante demostraciones contra fraude electoral alegado en Tabasco.

Apenas recientemente, el New York Times Enrique Krauze ha tomado la posición editorial que demanda a López que Obrador está enviando un mensaje messianic que llevaría en un culto de la personalidad que es perjudicial a los ideales democráticos.

La derecha tiene ningún doubtly que trabaja en horas extras para cerciorarse de que el meme estándar está oído - el socialismo fallará. El propagandista tiene eveb salido de su manera de declarar Obrador un desastre mientras que ayuda a la pintura Obrador de la campaña de Calderón como siendo Hugo Chavez de Venezuela o Evo Morales de Bolivia. Recientemente, Greg Palast divulgado que BushCo tiene planes para aparejar la elección mexicana.

Todas las naciones de la blanco tenían una cosa en campo común además de una carencia de terroristas: cada uno tenía un candidato presidencial izquierdo-que se inclinaba o un presidente en funciones izquierdo-que se inclinaba. En Venezuela, presidente Hugo Chavez, noir del bete de la administración de Bush, hacía frente a un voto de memoria. En México, el alcalde de Ciudad de México, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador de contra-Bush (y es) conducía la raza para la presidencia.
...
En México este domingo, podemos esperar ver igual: los desafíos de los votantes de Obrador en una raza, las encuestas dicen, están también cerca de llamada. Las reglas de no ese México necesitan lecciones de la administración de Bush en cómo ensuciar con elecciones.

En 1988, el candidato al partido de Obrador de la revolución democrática (PDR), que los sondeos de opinión demostraron como cierto ganador, subió de alguna manera brevemente contra el partido del titular de la élite predominante. Algunos de los trucos electorales estaban lejos de sutil. En el estado de Guerrero, el PDR conducía en las hojas oficiales de la cuenta por 359.369. Extrañamente, la cuenta final oficial era 309.202 para el partido predominante, solamente 182.874 para el PDR. Desafiador el voto habría sido peligroso. Asesinaron a dos funcionarios superiores del partido de Obrador durante la campaña.

Qué está haciendo esta elección que interesa hoy, Obrador ha acusado ya el Calderón de fraude procurado, tan aunque Calderón prevalece, allí será una probabilidad del malestar. Las elecciones presidenciales en México están de gran interés a México regional y aquí en los E.E.U.U. ¿Pero para los que estén siguiendo el discusión de la inmigración, uno tiene que preguntarse, si Andrés López Obrador ganara, quiere la administración de Bush comienza su deportación total en la venganza al resultado de elección? ¿O es el triunfo de Calderón, cuál este medio para México, voluntad que sea negocio como de costumbre y qué él lo significa gobernaría con un puño del hierro?

Hoy será muy interesante. Consonancia de la estancia.

Noticias: 9:31 El consejero presidente del IFE, Luis Carlos Ugalde Ramírez, dará un mensaje a la Nación a las 19:55 para felicitar a la ciudadanía y funcionarios electorales por haber hecho de esta elección un éxito.

18:32 - Roberto Madrazo se encuentra reunido con la directiva del PRI desde las 14 horas en la sede nacional. Anuncian que podría presentarse a una conferencia de prensa. También emiten dos comunicados, en los cuales establecen irregularidades en los estados de Tampico y Reynosa. (Monitor MVS)

17:52 - El presidente de la Comisión Estatal Electoral de Nuevo León (CEE), Eduardo Guerra Sepúlveda, informó que la jornada electoral se desarrolla en forma tranquila y limpia, con incidentes que no empañan el proceso.

17:44 - Detienen a activistas en Cozumel, pero los liberan

17:39 - Más de 25 mil observadores nacionales e internacionales de 60 países se encuentran en nuestro país, con el fin de vigilar el desarrollo de la jornada electoral que se vive en México desde el primer minuto de este domingo.

17:33 - La Comisión Nacional de Empresarios Jóvenes (Coparmex) envió un comunicado donde resumió las principales anomalías que detectaron sus 36 observadores electorales en 200 casillas en León, Guanajuato.

17:29 - Anuncian denuncia penal contra candidato del PAN

17:28 - Los estados con más afluencia de votantes han sido Aguascalientes, Yucatán, Tabasco, México, Puebla, Veracruz y el DF, informó su equipo al Ejecutivo.

17:04 - Planea PRI-DF impugnar elección, pues los priistas destacan que analizarán todas y cada una de las actas y los hechos reportados como irregularidades en la jornada electoral.

17:00 - La mala organización de las elecciones en las casilla ubicadas en la Universidad de León, en Guanajuato, originó la dificultad para votar a personas de la tercera edad y con capacidades diferentes; algunas de ellas no pudieron emitir su voto.

16:53 - El Comité Ejecutivo Nacional (CEN) del PRI denunció que en las ciudades de Reynosa y Tampico, Tamaulipas, fueron detectadas fricciones, presuntamente encabezadas por funcionarios y militantes del PAN y PRD.

16:01 - El PRI capitalino tiene reportes de más de 500 incidentes en el proceso electoral local, por lo que ya estudia la posibilidad de impugnarlo.

Resultados son
Marcelo Ebrard 52%; Demetrio Sodi 28% y Beatriz Paedes 17%. (Tv Azteca)

Aventaja Juan Manuel Oliva, del PAN, en gubernatura de Guanajuato con 64%, Miguel Ángel Chico Herrera del PRI-PVEM, 24%; y Ricardo García Oceguera (PRD-PT) con 12% (Tv Azteca)

Elecciones de Guanajuato, los resultados son: Juan Manuel Oliva con 59%; Miguel Ángel Chico con 25%; y Ricardo García con 15%. (Televisa)

Elecciones en Jalisco: Emilio González del PAN, obtiene 46% de la intención del voto; Arturo Zamora del PRI, 41%; Enrique Ibarra de la coalición Por el Bien de Todos (PRD-PT) 9%. (TV Azteca) (Haz click aqui)

Resultados Electorales Preliminares
20:01 - Según la encuesta de salida contratada por EL UNIVERSAL a IPSOS-BIMSA, empresa especializada en la elaboración de este tipo de estudios, los candidatos de la coalición Por el Bien de Todos, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, y del PAN, Felipe Calderón, se encontraban empatados. (EL UNIVERSAL)

20:01 - Tv Azteca indica diferencia menor a 2 puntos y no da resultados

20:14 En el rubro de diputados federales,
PAN 35%
PRD 31%
PRI 28%
(Univision)

Des de 10:06 CT 12.8%
Calderón 39.55%
López 35.03%
Madrazo 18.78%

Des de 10:36 CT with 20.25%
Calderón 38.91%
López 35.50%
Madrazo 18.92%

Des de 11:00 CT con 30%
Calderón - 38.5%
López - 35.5%

Des de 05:30AM CT con 87.2%
Calderón - 36.88%
López - 35.65%

En Univision.

Obrador se proclamó ganador
Andrés Manuel López Obrador se pronunció respetuoso de las decisiones del IFE, pero afirmó que de acuerdo con los resultados del PRD, ganó la presidencia de México.

Pero, Reforma.com dice:

Y el ganador es...
Aunque Calderón y López Obrador se declararon ganadores de la elección, lo cierto es que hoy México no tiene un vencedor de la contienda presidencial.

Des de 05:50AM CT con 89.5%
Calderón - 36.77%
López - 35.61%

Des de 06:15AM CT con 90.7%
Calderón - 36.71%
López - 35.59%
Madrazo - 21.02%

Des de 06:30AM CT con 91.88% actas procesadas
Calderón - 36.64% - 13,439,408
López - 35.54% - 13,036,825
Madrazo - 21.10% - 7,741,415

Des de 06:47AM CT con 92.71% actas procesadas
Calderón - 36.62% - 13,520,591
López - 35.50% - 13,107,712
Madrazo - 21.17% - 7,815,996

Des de 07:05AM CT con 93.26% actas procesadas
Calderón - 36.59% - 13,570,835
López - 35.49% - 13,161,635
Madrazo - 21.2% - 7,864,779

Des de 07:24AM CT con 93.82% actas procesadas
Calderón - 36.57% - 13,623,611
López - 35.48% - 13,216,663
Madrazo - 21.24% - 7,914,945

Des de 08:13AM CT con 94.99% actas procesadas
Calderón - 36.52% - 13,730,646
López - 35.44% - 13,323,686
Madrazo - 21.34% - 8,022,590

Read more!